"America's been trying to install democracies in nations for a century. And it hasn't worked ONE TIME."

>"America's been trying to install democracies in nations for a century. And it hasn't worked ONE TIME."

Is this true?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_South_Korea
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

no

yea

we installed functional democracies in Japan, South Korea, the Philippines.
despite those three I think we should give up and let people choose their own fate instead of meddling in business that doesn't involve us.

yes

Kinda.
>Post WW2 West Germany and Japan
>Leave Philippines with similar system to ours that mostly works
>Back South Korea, who eventually goes democratic
Most other cases yeah it doesn't work out.

You've also been heavily involved with alot of central and south american nations as well as with several island nations in the area, mostly to limit the threat of communism but also for personal interest.
Also direct invasion such as Panama, Cuba and Grenada just to name a few.

Grenada was run by coups and assassinations from its independence until our invasion.

The US invasion has been ruled a crime by the UN but Grenada's had a functioning democracy since then.

Japan, Korea, West Germany etc

Notice how all the shitholes that failed were full of subhumans who couldn't modernize

Grenada was one of your better moments, of which there are many, but you've done some pretty shady shit as well.
As far as democracy installations are concerned, I think the U.S has done a pretty good job so far.

I'm very proud of that little island nation but I'm pretty ashamed of everything else our government has done for 'democracy'.

I agree with Japan and Germany, but South Korea until 1987 had a US-backed autocratic regime.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_South_Korea
>South Korea's subsequent history is marked by alternating periods of democratic and autocratic rule. Civilian governments are conventionally numbered from the First Republic of Syngman Rhee to the contemporary Sixth Republic. The First Republic, arguably democratic at its inception, became increasingly autocratic until its collapse in 1960. The Second Republic was strongly democratic, but was overthrown in less than a year and replaced by an autocratic military regime. The Third, Fourth, and Fifth Republics were nominally democratic, but are widely regarded as the continuation of military rule.[1] With the Sixth Republic, the country has gradually stabilized into a liberal democracy.

We already have a functioning government at that time you fat fuck

You just invaded us for shit and giggles

They have installed democracy, the problem is their version of democracy is flawed and will never last, you only have to look at the US itself to see how many problems it has
Look at this map, anything blue or yellow is not a country you think of as stable or prosperous except maybe south korea
If the US embraced parliamentary syle (red, orange) and exported it instead of their presidential style we would probably be sipping tea on mars by now

We were in the midst of kicking Spain's ass, gaining the Philippines was a bit of an afterthought. Rather mixed feelings on everything that ensued because Half-Flip.
>Flawed and will never last
Its done pretty well so far, bar a couple hiccups along the way.

name one blue country without serious corruption or abuse of power issues

the United States and Brazil.

Not since South Korea on any meaningful scale.

We have become so divided we couldn't even bring democracy back to our own country let alone to a foreign power.

>United States
>no serious corruption issues

I'm not convinced you actually live in America.

Germany worked, I suppose. But sort of. Japan definitely worked though.

Nothing else that I can think of off the top of my head.

germany, japan, south korea

>Brazil
For the last year, at least every 4 months some big Brazilian company is caught systematically bribing governments and inspectors.

See: Petrobras, Odebretch, rotten meat, etc.

Well, south Korea did have protests against their president because she had too much power and was manipulated.

And France and Finland are yellow on the map.
They're breddy stable bar the memes

I would say mine has gotten a hell of a lot better. I can confess I can't say the same for most South American countries with the exception of Chile.

Im not denying Japan is sucessful but it just isn't a democracy by any mean.

South Korea

The US system is literally the only system that has stayed a democratic republic without reverting back to monarchy and dictatorship over the past 200+ years

>reverting back to monarchy
what country has reverted back to monarchy under parliamentary system?

On top of my head switzerland and san marino

All the western "monarchies" are purely for show and just for tradition and tourism. They are all democracies.

Most are successful in the grand scheme of things if you consider what the alternatives could have been.

All of the South American countries we over-threw could have become like Venezuela now, or even Mao tier.

Iraq has elected officials...they are slowly getting their shit together. Perhaps they will become better once ISIS gets removed. (I know we installed Saddam, but we still over-threw him and installed a government)

We also help keep Liberia from collapsing--often.

In the long run I believe history will record our interventionism as a success.

And if it does not---well fuck communists anyway, atleast we saved everyone from that.

>They are slowly getting their shit together
Emphasis on slow, pal. Though the Iranians may end up stabilizing much of it.
>Keep Liberia from collapsing
There's not many good reasons to talk about Liberia.
>History will record our interventionism as a success
I doubt it. Certain ones ended up much better than others.

The UK's queen is still secretly in charge of the Common wealth, she can, and has, called major political shots in Canada in recent years.

>Philippines
>functional democracy

>UK
>functional democracy

Sharia isn't a democracy, Nigel Al-Britan

>stable or prosperous except maybe south korea
RoK won't even exist in 50 years when the next Un goes crazy

UK is the oldest and most stable democracy in the world

France

...

If japan isn't a democracy, then the Uk isn't a democracy either.

>Monarchy=/=democracy

This.
Also, has no one considered that parliamentary systems have more to do with countries that were imperialistic or had a monarchy at some point.
There is also the cultural influence.
The US presidential system influenced much of the Americas as it made sense to do that for a shared history with America.

The UK influence many of it's colonies, and Japan ended up getting a similar parliamentary system, due to their monarchic system.

Parliamentary systems aren't inherently superior. The mapshows many parliamentary fail countries.
Somalia? Bulgaria? etc.

The presidential system is the most widely used, not everyone is going to be successful.

Also, political systems aren't insurers of wealth. Those countries who picked parliamentary systems were wealthy to begin with.

and plenty of parliamentary systems have collapse into dictatorship.

Presidential systems are MORE democratic, as the people get to pic their leaders.
In parliamentary systems, the people only pic the party, and then the party leaders can pick whoever the fuck they want.

We aren't doing too bad.
When you read all the shit being flung at the US. You end up getting the idea that we are congo level of corruption. Not really bro.

I read the report, and nothing changed in america apart from Trump's election and "a lack of trust in the government"

Trust doesn't all of a sudden change your political system.

the thing that went down the most was the "functioning of government" which isn't an objective measure but simply an opinion poll.

I get the same thing from every index.
Partisanship and economic inequality always pushes america to the bottom of every index.

I wouldn't say it's too bad here, and I consider the US a full democracy. I think these indexes put too much emphasis on problems.

Also, how the hell do European have greater "civil liberties" than Americans.
Americans are free from the government to a much greater extend. From guns to freedom of speech.
No one here gets arrested for "hate speech"

No. Because USA wasn't establishing democracies, but loyal regimes for exploitation of other countries

>constitutional Republic is democracy
Nah

UK isn't democracy.
Even democracy isn't democracy. Democracy is meme.

>constitutional republic
Yes, that is a democracy m8.

I think you meant
>Constitutional monarchy
Then I agree.

Oh, yeah, I've mistyped.
But republic is not equal to democracy.
For example, Roman Empire still was called Res Publica, even during the principate and dominate periods.

Yes, but most republics today are democracies.
The US is technically a constitutional republic. Like most other countries.

Democracy isn't a system of government. But some systems of governments are democracies. Modern constitutional republics are or try to be democracies at the very least.

Inshallah brother

No matter how much they try to show their democratism with all that equality stuff, they can't overcome the class nature of the state.

nothing is perfect m8, but you gotta try to be better at least.

>Philippines
>functional
>democratic

Well, all that's left is to wait for economical basis to change

>Philippines
>mostly works

Come on Australia, you can do better than that.

Negative liberties aren't the only liberties.

The Americans first tried to install democracy in the middle of the 18th century and it didn't work then either.

FROM SEA TO SHINING SEA

>negative liberties
It's not negative. You don't get to put arrest someone for hating another person.
You get at thought policing at this point.

But again, the cultural views are different.
This is a European Index. European values are going to reflect.

There is no way in hell that the welfare states of europe give greater civil liberties than America.

At least not most of them, not spain for sure.

>Is there a constitution?
If yes, it's a "Constitutional X".
If no, it's something else, but still "X".

>Is there a monarch?
If yes, "X" is "Monarchy".
If no, "X" is "Republic".

Independent issue:
>Are subjects allowed to vote regarding who holds certain offices or on specific pieces of law?
If yes, it's a democracy.

Negative rights are liberties. There aren't "positive liberties". There may be positive rights, but those aren't liberties of any kind.

The problem is democracy is a terrible idea.

Not all European countries are like the UK.

>Americans are free from the government to a much greater extend
I'm sorry but a country where a policeman can shoot me in my own home without warrant for nothing but opening the door and get away with it does noit have "great civil liberties".

The worst the state restricts me here is that I'm not allowed to unironically make up bullshit historical revionist nonsense and I can't draw show around a swastika unless I say I'm doing it irnoically, then its okay again.

Empire of Liberty

>The Empire of Liberty is a theme developed first by Thomas Jefferson to identify the responsibility of the United States to spread freedom across the world. Jefferson saw the mission of the U.S. in terms of setting an example, expansion into western North America, and by intervention abroad.

1 of 4 American doctrines
the others being

Manifest Destiny
Frontier Thesis
City upon a Hill

It wasn't your "system". It is the guns.

Pic related, that is what kept you free for so long. Libtard, convert yourself to the way of the gun.